Wow that is pretty cool but part of me worries we soon will reach a point with software that technique or getting it right in camera are just silly notions sported by old men with greying beards. Then again we're probably already there.

Wow that is pretty cool but part of me worries we soon will reach a point with software that technique or getting it right in camera are just silly notions sported by old men with greying beards. Then again we're probably already there.

It is still, and always ever will be, all about the light.

Shoot in great light and the equipment almost doesn't matter; you're going to get good (if not great) photos.

Shoot in bad light and there's not much that the equipment can do to make it a good photo.

The challenge, of course, lies in finding and / or making the light....

All that writ, anything that helps avoid or fix stupid mistrakes (such as camera shake) is always welcome. Really, as photographers, worrying about keeping the camera steady is a distraction from what we should be doing. Devoting fewer brain cells to keeping the camera from jiggling and more to the light can only be a good thing.

I wonder how it compares to dedicated de-convolving software (topaz, etc).

Same. This is new feature to Photoshop but not a new technology. Deconvolution techniques work very well for a single type of known movement such as a camera translation on one axis. It works less well for complex (i.e. real world) camera movements. (according to my understanding, which could be flawed).